Appeal 2006-3001
Application 10/747,840
Hill I discloses (col. 4, ll. 45-68) a method of producing verified,
embossed, and encoded credit cards mounted to matched carrier forms. The
method includes the steps of embossing the face of a credit card,
magnetically encoding similar information on a magnetic strip on the back
of the card, and inserting the card into a verifiably matched and correctly
printed carrier form. Nowhere does Hill I mention optical disks or a binding
line.
The term "optical disk" is well-defined in the art as a storage disk that
is read or played using a laser. The term includes CDs, CD-ROMs, laser
disks, DVDs, digital optical disks, and numeric optical disks, as indicated by
Appellants (Reply 2). Thus, contrary to the Examiner's assertions, the
recitation of "optical disk" in claim 1 is broader than the recitation of a CD,
CD-ROM, and DVD in claim 2 and need not encompass mediums such as
cards with magnetic stripes, which are known not to be optical disks. A
credit card which is embossed on one side and has a magnetic strip on the
other side is neither optical nor a disk. Accordingly, Hill I fails to disclose
writing electronic information to an optical disk.
"It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under § 102 can be found
only if the prior art reference discloses every element of the claim." In re
King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986). See also
Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist and Derrick, 730
F.2d 1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Since Hill I lacks a
teaching of an optical disk, Hill I cannot anticipate claims 1, 3, 6, 21, and 22.
The Examiner (Answer 3) asserts that claims 11, 13, 14, and 22 are
anticipated by Hill II. Appellants contend (Br. 9) that Hill II, like Hill I, fails
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013